Rudy Giuliani on Energy & Oil

Former Mayor of New York City; Republican Candidate for 2000 Senate (NY)

Support the technologies that improve alternative energy use

The very best way to reduce carbon emission is to support the technologies that are alternatives that can save the environment, and to get us to the point where those technologies can actually take over. We haven’t licensed a nuclear power plant in 30
years. We need to expand the use of hybrid vehicles. We need to expand the use of clean coal. Carbon sequestration is expensive, but it’s a process that works. We have more coal reserves in the US than they have oil reserves in Saudi Arabia. I prefer
incentives for these new industries. Same thing is true with biofuels. We should expand biofuels, the way Brazil has done. We should expand wind, solar, hydroelectric. We should expand natural gas, liquid natural gas. We should have a project like puttin
the man on a moon, the way we did back in the ‘50s and ‘60s. It should be a major national project, to be energy independent. That’s a matter of national security. It’s also the best way, the very best way, to protect against global warming.

Opposes mandated 35mpg by 2020; develop alternatives instead

Q: Congress has passed an energy bill which would mandate 35 mpg for automobiles by the year 2020. Would you support that?

A: That isn’t the way I think it should be done. I think what we should be doing is developing the alternatives so it’s possible
to accomplish that as opposed to just setting mandates and not having the support there for expansion of hybrid vehicles, expansion of biofuels, including ethanol.

Q: But you’re against increasing miles per gallon.

A: I would not do it that way, yes.
I would do it with heavy expansion of hybrid vehicles, which move some of the sources over to electricity, then deal with clean coal, nuclear power, hybrid vehicles, expansion of hydroelectric power, more oil refineries, more domestic oil.
Those are the things that we should be supporting. And we should be selling that to the rest of the world. So the real emphasis here should be on developing energy independence and creating these alternative industries.

Don’t draw the line anywhere--advance all technologies

Q: How will this country become oil independent?

A: I think Iran would be a lot more of a paper tiger if we were more energy independent. You could go on into a lot of examples like that. This is a matter of national security. You’ve got to support all
the alternatives. There’s no magic bullet here--biofuels, nuclear power. We haven’t licensed a nuclear power plant in 30 years. We haven’t had a new refinery in 30 years. We’re on hold. Hydroelectric power, solar power, wind power, conservation--
we have to support all of these things. The president has to treat this like putting a man on the moon.

Q: But where do you draw the line? Do you support drilling off the coast of Florida, California?

A: You don’t draw the line anywhere.
What you do is you work with people to try to advance all of these technologies. Long-term damage to our environment would be a mistake, that would be an overreaction. You have to make sound judgments, and you have to advance these new technologies.

Accept global warming & work toward energy independence

Q: Is science wrong on global warming? And what, if any, steps would you take as president to address the issue of climate change?

GIULIANI: I think we have to accept the view that scientists have that there is global warming and that humans contribute
to that. And the fact is that there is a way to deal with it and to address it in a way that we can also accomplish energy independence, which we need as a matter of national security. It’s frustrating and really dangerous for us to see money going to
our enemies because we have to buy oil from certain countries. We should be supporting all the alternatives. We need a project similar to putting a man on the moon.

ROMNEY: Rudy Giuliani is right in terms of an
Apollo project to get us energy independent, and the effects of that on global warming are positive. It’s a no-regrets policy. It’s a great idea. [We need,] as a strategic imperative, energy independence for America. And it takes that Apollo project.

Signing Kyoto would just move CO2 emissions to China & India

Q: If we sign Kyoto, wouldn’t then a lot of factories and jobs and investments just move offshore to China and India?

A: They would move offshore to China and India and it would have no impact on global warming.
Whatever your scientific conclusion about global warming, whether it’s manmade or it isn’t or whatever, the reality is that if you don’t have restrictions on
China, if you don’t have restrictions on India, our contribution, ultimately, is going to be minor. We could put all these restrictions on ourselves and have just as much arguable global warming if
China, India, some of these other countries that are going to be contributing a lot more to this don’t become part of some kind of system to create alternatives.

No new energy tax; focus on alternatives instead

Q: Al Gore wants carbon caps and a carbon tax. What’s your take?

A: I don’t like taxes. I don’t know how to make that any clearer. I don’t like taxes. Inventing new ones is a very big mistake. Find other ways to do it. If you want to deal with
global warming, the way to deal with global warming is to develop these alternative technologies. Get serious about energy independence, so we wouldn’t have to send money to our enemies. Let’s put the resources in to catch up on ethanol.

Nuclear power is dangerous, but nobody’s died from it

We should get serious about why we haven’t licensed a new nuclear power plant in 30 years because people are afraid of nuclear power. I do security work for nuclear power.
Nuclear power is dangerous, so is every other form of power, but nobody’s died from nuclear power. China is building 40 nuclear power plants. India just made a deal, so they can build nuclear power plants.

Develop energy-independent technology, but not wind power

Let’s look at wind and solar from the point of view of can we spare that energy? Right now, it’s inconsistent energy. When the wind is blowing, you get energy. When it isn’t, you don’t. Is there a way to develop a technology that you can store it?
Can we clean coal? Carbon sequestration, it can be done. Can we expand it? The other benefit is looking at a pro growth way: we move ourselves to that energy independence and then we also create an industry, a new industry in America.

Got to expand nuclear and do clean coal

We have to take the idea of energy independence and turn it into a program for energy independence. It has to be done on the scale of putting a man on the moon. All of the things that they’ve all talked about, we’ve talked about it a long time;
we just haven’t done it. We’ve got to expand nuclear. We’ve got to do clean coal. We’ve got to expand the use of hybrid vehicles, wind, solar, hydroelectric, liquid natural gas, natural gas, domestic oil, more refineries.

Source: 2008 Facebook/WMUR-NH Republican primary debate
Jan 5, 2006

Open Strategic Petroleum Reserve to battle high oil prices

Giuliani repeated his criticism of the Clinton administration’s refusal to free up part of the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve to counterbalance the soaring cost of oil. In Plattsburgh, close to the Canadian border, Giuliani said he had visited the
frigid city because it had experienced “the biggest impact in the state” from a sharp spike in oil prices. He said the increases in oil prices provides “an illustration of what I can do if elected to the Senate. I am willing to take on the president.”

Source: Thomas Lueck, New York Times
Feb 17, 2000

Oil crisis is “compelling justification” to use Reserves

One of the purposes of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is to protect Americans from market manipulations and artificial shortages created by OPEC. The current crisis in the Northeast presents a compelling justification for the
release of a portion of the reserves. I urge the President to sell some of the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserves to offset the recent dramatic increase in the price of home heating oil in New York City.